ArticlePloS one2023
Strategies for data normalization and missing data imputation and consequences for potential diagnostic microRNA biomarkers in epithelial ovarian cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biochemical and Molecular Markers Among Prediabetic and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients.International journal of endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Article
- MicroRNAs in long COVID: roles, diagnostic biomarker potential and detection.Human genomics · 2025Review
- Identification of stably expressed microRNAs in plasma from high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma and benign tumor patients.Molecular biology reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small non-coding RNA molecules regulating gene expression with diagnostic potential in different diseases, including epithelial ovarian carcinomas (EOC). As only a few studies have been published on the identification of stable endogenous miRNA in EOC, there is no consensus which miRNAs should be used aiming standardization. Currently, U6-snRNA is widely adopted as a normalization control in RT-qPCR when investigating miRNAs in EOC; despite its variable expression across cancers being reported. Therefore, our goal was to compare different missing data and normalization approaches to investigate their impact on the choice of stable endogenous controls and subsequent survival analysis while performing expression analysis of miRNAs by RT-qPCR in most frequent subtype of EOC: high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). 40 miRNAs were included based on their potential as stable endogenous controls or as biomarkers in EOC. Following RNA extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissues from 63 HGSC patients, RT-qPCR was performed with a custom panel covering 40 target miRNAs and 8 controls. The raw data was analyzed by applying various strategies regarding choosing stable endogenous controls (geNorm, BestKeeper, NormFinder, the comparative ΔCt method and RefFinder), missing data (single/multiple imputation), and normalization (endogenous miRNA controls, U6-snRNA or global mean). Based on our study, we propose hsa-miR-23a-3p and hsa-miR-193a-5p, but not U6-snRNA as endogenous controls in HGSC patients. Our findings are validated in two external cohorts retrieved from the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus database. We present that the outcome of stability analysis depends on the histological composition of the cohort, and it might suggest unique pattern of miRNA stability profiles for each subtype of EOC. Moreover, our data demonstrates the challenge of miRNA data analysis by presenting various outcomes from normalization and missing data imputation strategies on survival analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.